Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Service Functions in National Parks from the Perspective of Benefits of Community Residents

Abstract

The ecosystem of national parks bears some cultural features. How the cultural ecosystem service functions are perceived by the public and how the cultural ecosystem service functions shape the public’s cognition have become urgent scientific questions. This paper performs a case analysis on the Qianjiangyuan National Park System Pilot Area, a representative national park in China, which clarifies the main types of cultural ecosystem service functions from the perspective of the landscape aesthetics benefits of community residents, and analyze the varied impacts of demographics on functional cognition. On this basis, the entropy weight method was adopted to evaluate the importance of each function. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation was employed to assess the composite level of the cultural service functions. The results show that: (1) the community residents value the benefits brought by the national park the most in terms of the ecological improvement function, and the situation is consistent across the four towns/townships; by contrast, the community residents attach the least importance to the benefits in terms of system governance function. (2) Except for the years of local residence, the community residents’ cognition of different cultural ecosystem service functions may vary significantly, owing to factors like gender, age, education level, occupation, and annual mean income. (3) Concerning the importance of functional indices, the importance scores of the natural experience functions, humanistic concern functions, and social service functions are 0.3286, 0.3503, and 0.3211, respectively. The community residents had a moderate to high level of cognition for the cultural ecosystem service functions (3.99). The different types of functions can be sorted by effectiveness as: the social service functions (4.11) > natural experience functions (4.03) > humanistic concern functions (3.86). The research results provide a reference for improving the management level of national parks, and ease the increasingly prominent contradiction between people and land.